Yes, But There Could Be Changes. The common core creates a rigor of standards that is equal across the whole nation. Doing this allows for stability and coherence in creating a foundation for basic skills for students in education. There should be some changes to the system. There should be \”take away\’s\” when going from elementary to middle school and middle school to high school. The \”take away\’s\” would be the main ideas of the grades that a student must understand to move on. This helps build a community of teachers within each building. It should be necessary so that all of the kids are learning the same things roughly around the same age. This way all of the kids could stay on track and all be learning the same things at the same time. This may be important, for example, if you have students that have to move around a lot. If they were all learning the same thing around the same time the students would be able to stay on track, because they\’re all learning the same things. It should be necessary so that all of the kids are learning the same things roughly around the same age. This way all of the kids could stay on track and all be learning the same things at the same time. This may be important, for example, if you have students that have to move around a lot. If they were all learning the same thing around the same time the students would be able to stay on track, because they\’re all learning the same things. There should be a national curriculum because it keeps everyone learning at the same level. Even though not all schools will teach the same, they will still be following the same guidelines. This keeps everyone going at the same pace, and it would be beneficial if a student were to transfer from one state to another.
They would not be behind. I\’m Canadian, and I\’m 15 years old. But I\’ve moved 19 times and I\’ve noticed schools throughout just my one p[province, have very different teaching methods. In grade 8 I was at three different schools and at each of those schools I had to read the giver, one after another. One of those schools I was in grade 7. When you\’re teaching people in grade 9 things some other students learned in grade 7 you know you have a problem. Yes, I do believe there should be a national curriculum. I am in the military, so my children constantly move to different states. When a child moves from on state to another they should be able to fall back into class with little to no issues. Some schools have different requirements, some have more or less than others to gain a high school diploma. When I moved to a different state, I just repeated what I had learned two years before. There were not any advanced programs in my new area. School was boring, and the topics that I did not know were covered the year before. There needs to be a national curriculum. Yes, I personally believe that there needs to be a current national curriculum for all students. It needs to be the same for all states and all grades. Some kids are way behind others because of the low standards some states set for them. For example, I do know personally that my son\’s friend who moved to Austrailia or 2nd grade is way ahead of him here in the States. There needs to be some type of national standards. If it is left up to the states than they will use their own standards to look good.
If there is a nation curriculum than the states would have no other choice than to live up to the standards that everyone else is. It doesn\’t need to be specific down to every last letter, but there need to be some guidelines to make sure the bases are being covered. More importantly, there needs to be protection in some states that boastfully deny and steer away from science that mandates it that they have to teach things that are agreed upon by millions upon millions of scientists. This would also help with requiring sex education, which needs to be an option for students everywhere.
Debates about curriculum have always been highly contentious. The very word \’curriculum\’ has multiple meanings among educators. The term is used here to refer to the knowledge that a society selects from the total available reservoir of knowledge and therefore deems as valued and essential for students to learn in schools. In recent decades, there has been an exponential growth in the complexity and volume of knowledge. More people are now likely to be employed in knowledge generating industries. New technologies tend to speed up the processes of knowledge generation and dissemination. Information and ideas now flow rapidly across the globe through digital networks. We are all encouraged to log on, anytime, anywhere to access and engage with information in a wired world. However, access to information does not necessarily equate to acquisition or learning. Highly specialist knowledge is costly to acquire in terms of time, resources, and effort. It is simple. Prior knowledge is critical to understanding and acquiring new information in speciality knowledge domains.
Schools continue to be key institutions for determining who acquires what types of knowledge. Those students who do not get the essential or core knowledge distributed through schooling institutions are likely to be disadvantaged. So why is it important to have a national curriculum? The rapid and continuous growth in knowledge means that curriculum documents need to be regularly reviewed and revised. Concerns have been raised that current processes of curriculum renewal have not been keeping pace with new knowledge generation. Pooling of resources across states will assist the pace of curriculum renewal, revision and dissemination. Students are unlikely to acquire essential knowledge if it is not prescribed in curriculum documents. There needs to be agreement about the valued or essential knowledge that all Australian students need to learn for full participation in our society. Lack of curriculum consistency across states is also confusing for parents and students in today\’s highly mobile society. There has been a concerted push for a national curriculum in Australia for over two decades. It is imperative that we seize this opportunity to accelerate the pace of movement towards the development and implementation of a national curriculum across all key learning areas. At the same time, local education authorities, schools and teachers need to have the resources and professional autonomy to make this curriculum relevant and meaningful to students in local contexts. Professor Parlo Singh is head of the school of Education and Professional Studies at Griffith University.